Re: Is Fax Dead Yet?

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 06:23:11 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
<speffSNIP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 19:39:19 -0700, the renowned D from BC
<myrealaddress@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 03:35:09 +0200 (CEST), Anonymous <cripto@xxxxxxx>
wrote:

Joel Koltner wrote:

"Robert Latest" <boblatest@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:674620F2lp232U3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
128 bit -- high-end?

When it comes to consumer electronics, 128-bit encryption is still "high end."

When it comes to encryption in general 128 bits are still high end,
depending on the implementation. Robert is apparently very unaware
of the actual math behind modern crypto.

I mean, that's like Blu-Ray players and other heavily DRM stuff... DVDs are
only 40 bits, and a poorly implemented system to boot! :-)

SSL/TLS is 128, and considered plenty secure. Even "weak" 40 bit SSL
is considered much stronger than the crap implementations used in
DRM. Numbers of bits has far less to do with things than some
neophytes believe.

Reminds me of my college days with the 486 processor.
I played with some homebrew encryption ideas.
I had a random number generator shift all the document characters.
The random numbers used were stored to make a big fat 'key file'
which was a large as the document.
Without the 'key file', the document is just noise and should be
uncrackable.
asdliupiellkwjpbu'ldjkpojeojlmad;viwojojd << It can't be decoded.
It's just noise.

That's called a "one-time pad" and cannot be decoded (assuming the pad
itself is random) unless you start re-using it for other documents (or
allow it to become non-secret before the value of the information is
zero). One problem is communicating the pad from one end to the other.
Another is a lack of authentication.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

Neato... I never knew the name of that crypto method.


D from BC
British Columbia
Canada
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is Fax Dead Yet?
    ... I played with some homebrew encryption ideas. ... I had a random number generator shift all the document characters. ... Glue under postage stamp, don a dark trenchcoat, hat, dark sunglasses, brisk walk to mailbox, look over shoulder, look over shoulder some more, drop the letter in, push Smith&Wesson back into holster, saunter down the road and whistle a tune. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Advice on a new encryption algorithm
    ... > say false is because it is based on a Non-Random Number Generator. ... the tables always the same for every encryption. ... > Here is where I worry that all the math gurus will cut my algorithm to ... All I am doing is converting the characters of the plaintext ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Is Fax Dead Yet?
    ... When it comes to consumer electronics, 128-bit encryption is still "high end." ... I had a random number generator shift all the document characters. ... The random numbers used were stored to make a big fat 'key file' ... It's just noise. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Is Fax Dead Yet?
    ... When it comes to consumer electronics, 128-bit encryption is still "high end." ... I had a random number generator shift all the document characters. ... It's just noise. ... That's called a "one-time pad" and cannot be decoded (assuming the pad ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Efficient pseudo-random number generation
    ... > deliver 16 bits and the requirements of its statistical performance are ... 31-bit generator IS suitable for encryption. ... cryptographic purposes, regardless of size. ...
    (comp.lang.cpp)